conlangfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Rangyayo
This is one of the most attractive conlangs I have ever seen. Keep up the good work. If you can give me any methods of instant communication I'd gladly talk about rangyayo. Consider me a fan of it :) RWHÔ 07:35, June 12, 2011 (UTC) :Sure I would love to :) are you on zompist bboard? if yes, please drop me a private message so we can swap msn contacts :) my id on that forum is "desmond" Deslee 23:55, June 12, 2011 (UTC) :or you can drop me an email sumomo UNDERSCORE nagamoto AT yahoo DOT com :) Deslee 13:11, June 14, 2011 (UTC) :: Thank you! My MSN address is canis_v@gazeta.pl. I would be honoured if we could talk about rangyayo :) RWHÔ 15:06, June 15, 2011 (UTC) why use japanese symbols? The Emperor Zelos 19:33, June 14, 2011 (UTC) :The writing system of Rangyayo is a mixed script of Chinese characters and Korean Hangul. The only "purely" Japanese symbol I have used so far is "々" which is an ideographic iteration mark, indicating that the previous Chinese character should be repeated :) Deslee 14:34, June 15, 2011 (UTC) why would you use that as a writting when so few of the world knows it? The Emperor Zelos 06:18, June 16, 2011 (UTC) : Emperor Zelos, not all conlangs are auxlangs... ;p RWHÔ 10:15, June 16, 2011 (UTC) :: Yes, Rangyayo is an East Asian artificial language. By using a hybrid writing system of Chinese characters and Korean Hangul, it gives the artlang Rangyayo an East Asian aesthetics. (Quenya and Klingon even have their own alphabets!) I've provided romanisation for all Rangyayo written and audio samples so that everyone can read the materials. :) Deslee 02:36, June 17, 2011 (UTC) I never meant it as it was meant as an auxlang I just find it redunant to have both roman and that when roman can be read by anyone who got internet and its obviously needed to get here The Emperor Zelos 07:07, June 17, 2011 (UTC) Any particular reason you're using the NIV? pá mamūnám ontā́ bán 21:48, April 16, 2012 (UTC) :Oh, I found that NIV was the easiest to understand. Is King James version (1611) the most common version? I already forgot which version I had studied when I was at school as a kid. Deslee 15:01, April 20, 2012 (UTC) ::Personally I'd use KJV but if you find NIV easier then I suppose that's okay. KJV is definitely more traditional and the English used is definitely a lot nicer and better. We didn't study the Bible at school. pá mamūnám ontā́ bán 15:25, April 20, 2012 (UTC) I have a bunch of questions! * What is the vocative in Rangyan? What are the different nuances of giving commands/requests? **By vocative, do you mean the vocative case? the case used for a noun identifying the person being addressed? if so, there's no vocative case for Rangyan nouns. Imperative mood is used both for giving commands and making requests. However for commands, honorific suffix ''-ya'' is dropped and usually with particle re attached at the end of the sentence for emphasis. Therefore, "Go away!" gubesüre and "Please go away." gubesüya Deslee 11:51, May 2, 2012 (UTC) * Is there a distinction between politeness/teineigo and honorific/sonkeigo in Rangyan? It would feel strange to me for a language with honorifics to not distinguish between politeness and honorific at all but do as you wish. * The Babel text translation leads me to ask: How does the history of Christianity in East Asia differ in your conworld? Many traditionally used Korean and Japanese Bibles *here* use an archaic register, and special verb forms are used to talk to God. So you would need an archaic version of Rangyan. What are the older forms of Rangyan like? I bet it would mostly be shrouded in mystery, as the situation is with Korean compared to IE languages *here*. I speculate that Old Rangyan might have had something similar to semantic yin/yang "gender". * What are the standard rules for Rangyanization of foreign terms? **I may need to write a whole page in order to clearly explain the Rangyanisation of foreign terms, but hopefully these two examples can give you a clearer picture, "Australia" os-thü-rei-rya: make full use of the 8 possible codas (m, n, ng, p, t, k, s, l) and diphthongs, ü is inserted into consonant clusters (e.g. -str-) that exceed the phonotactics allowed by Rangyan (CgVC). "Finland" phinrandü: /f/ and /v/ are Rangyanised to /pʰ/ and /b/ respectively. You can find more examples here (country names). Deslee 12:24, May 2, 2012 (UTC) **I hope you would explain when phonetic accuracy of consonants takes precedence to adding as few epenthetic syllables as possible. (e.g. is "flash" 프러시 or 프럿?) Standard Koreanization seems to strongly favor the former. 22:38, May 3, 2012 (UTC) * How do you derive Sino-Rangyan from Middle Chinese? **I refer to the pronunciations of Middle Chinese reconstructed by Bernhard Karlgren according to the Rime dictionary Guangyun compiled from AD1007 to AD1008. I have a set of sound change rules to simplify/convert/merge the complicated Middle Chinese pronunciations to Sino-Rangyan pronunciations (e.g. gʰĭwaŋ > gwang "lunatic" ). Deslee 12:49, May 2, 2012 (UTC) * I am sorry to be even more burdensome but could you indicate the position of the pitch accent in the Romanization (by e.g. marking the pre-downstep syllable with an acute accent)? 21:38, April 21, 2012 (UTC) Is the writing of hangul in Rangyayo correct? Hello. I'm Korean native and have made artlang marE. I think you have made this conlang with using system of Hanja with Hangul. So I think that this conlang should have natural feelings when Korean users see it. But I think it is not. in the Korean, ㅋ corresponds into kh, and ㄱ corresponds into k - so you just used ㄲ as g. But at the sense of Korean, ㄱ corresponds into /g/ and g, and ㅋ corresponds into /k/ and k, and ㄲ is another sound : so that will be make Koreans chaos when you use '食뽀마니외' as yabomanioi, they will read it as sik'ppomanioe - then will ask to you why use ㅃ as b. I think you can change phonetic values of Hangul as you want, but If you have a intend for use Hangul on this language as similar of regular hangul, I recommend change /ㄲ/ to ㄱ, /ㄱ/ to ㅋ, /ㄸ/ to ㄷ, /ㄷ/ to /ㅌ/, /ㅃ/ to ㅂ, /ㅂ/ to ㅍ, /ㅓ/ to /ㅔ/, and so on. - Ellif (talk) 15:01, September 5, 2013 (UTC) ::Seeing that Rangyayo is using a mixed script of Hanji and Yenmun (Hanja and Hangul), how cool is that to have a native Korean conlanger commented on my conlang. :) I was excited and thrilled! ::For the phonetic values, you are right that some of them represented by Rangyayo Yenmun are different from that represented by nowadays Korean Hangul. However, somehow there are traces for us to believe that the Rangyayo version of phonetic values may be closer to what the Hangul alphabet were originally pronounced in the document of Hunminjeongeum (corresponding to the Middle Korean language). ::First of all, Hunminjeongeum states that the doubled letters were once used to represent voiced consonants 전 탁음 자（全濁音字） - ㄲ /g/, ㄸ /d/, ㅃ /b/... ㅉ, ㅆ, ㆅ. And for vowel letter ㅓ, if we compare the corresponding Sino pronunciations of the Hanja that contains the vowel ㅓ, we are able to conclude that ㅓ is actually closer to /e/ in Middle Korean rather than /ɤ/ in Modern Korean (there could be a vowel shift when Middle Korean has evolved into Modern Korean). For example 선（鮮）is /ɕiɛn/ in Chinese, /sen/ in Japanese and /tiên/ in Vietnamese; and 건（健）is /tɕiɛn/ in Chinese, /ken/ in Japanese and /kiện/ in Vietnamese. And diphthong letters ㅐ ㅔ ㅚ may originally represent diphthongs in Middle Korean but have undergone monophthongization and become monophthongs in Modern Korean. For example, 새（賽）is /sai/ in Chinese, /sai/ in Japanese and /tái/ in Vietnamese. ::About the pronunciations of Rangyayo Hanji, nearly each Hanji has two pronunciations, like 食, the first one is the native pronounciation /ya/ as in 食쁘 /yabu/ "eat", the second one is the Sino pronouncation /jik/ as in 食塩 /jikyem/ "table salt (salt for eating)". The relationships between the two pronunciations can be paralleled with Kunyomi and Onyomi in Japanese :) --Deslee (talk) 12:28, November 12, 2013 (UTC) ::The main reason why you were not very impressed with the phonetic values of Rangyayo Yenmun, can be that the Hangul alphabet is only used by one language, the Modern Korean language. If it were used by more than one language like the Latin alphabet, in which many letters represent different phonemes in different languages, the Rangyayo version would be easier to swallow than it is now. For example, the Latin letter Y, has the sound values /j/ /i/ /ai/ in English but /y/ or /ʏ/ in the Scandinavian languages and in German; J has the sound values /dʒ/ in English but it is the palatal approximant /j/ in the great majority of other Germanic languages, Uralic and Slavic languages that use the Latin alphabet, and it is /x ~ h/ in Spanish and /ʒ/ in many other Romance languages.--Deslee (talk) 13:16, November 12, 2013 (UTC) Use of Chinese characters I think that the combination of Chinese characters with any other writing system is very unattractive, and that any such effort is unconvincing. One may attach different pronunciation to a single Chinese character, or even, under certain constraints, construct a new character themselves, yet one should never try to mix them with whatever graphemes representing only phonetic elements. That might work there in China where you come from, but Japan begs to disagree :v 16:37, August 22, 2015 (UTC) ~) The Elector, Darkness Immaculate